When diana said that charles was with camilla (in '80), the people said ''diana is inestable'' the time said she was right (charles ever was with camilla).
Well, now is some similar, the time will say, don't worry Tirapin, we are many more.

__________________

__________________Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".-www.theroyalist.net-

This thread shouldnt be closed. It is ok if it goes in circles. Its ok because facts and lies are reapeted and after a while the lies disappear and the facts remain. No one is damning you for loving Diana. She is an icon. He charity work, kids, fashion will always be a part of history. The sad part is the people wont let go of the sad part of Dianas life. She was not sad all the time. She was happy. Diana is not hurting anymore so there is no reason to make others feel pain. It is time to let go of the pains of the past. One should look back on history and see the good she did and the good that is still happining because of her. She hurt the monarchy, yes, she had many affairs, yes, she was a bit of a nut job, yes. But those are only a part of her that should be forgoten. When someone dies only the good should be remembered. Charles and Camilla shouldnt be damned. They have suffered too for there love. A forbidden love that has tooken them ages to get accepeted. Diana is gone, her pains and agony are gone. The good she did still exists. Let us remember that and use that to make the world a better place, not to destroy people and the monarchy.

__________________Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".-www.theroyalist.net-

if charles and camilla is true love, because them noy marriage in the '70?
no pain, no scandals, no diana in charles life.

__________________Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".-www.theroyalist.net-

I just dont see the point of carrying on the thread when people have appointed themselves defenders of Diana and defenders of Charles and Camilla - there's nothing to learn from this. Nobody is going to change their opinion and it just gets people angry and bad tempered.

like EDWARD VIII, I love this women, i will marry with this women, is more important for me the women I love than the monarchy.
Charles not, why? very simple, he wnat to be with camilla in private, with diana in public (for childen) and one day to be king. But this don't work.
to many king yes work, but for charles not.

__________________Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".-www.theroyalist.net-

When have they proven themselves not to be good for the monarchys image? Look at there job as Prince and Princess of the Realm. They have done an OUTSTANDING job. Since Charles was a teen he has developed the role of Prince of Wales into a well rounded job. He has set up charities for so many causes. He has helped millions around the world. He has raised millions for charities. He goes the extra mile to help his people. He tries hard to bring Britian in the future even if he is ridiculed for it. He doesnt have to do this but he did and he went the extra mile. He is an excellent Prince. Now lets look at Camilla, since joining the firm she has done an excellent job as Princess of the Realm. She is a great ambassador for Britian and the Commonwealth. She is very interactive with people and gets along with everyone. She has a great humour and is a fun person. She has a sex appeal that even confuses me sometimes. People see this person and they think the the British are like that. Down to earth, funny, friendly, and passionate. She is a wonderfull ambassador. They have done wonderfull jobs.

The Duke and Duchess of Windsor were in a different time and a different situation. He wanted to be with Camilla in private and Camilla in public but he wasn't allowed. Now he is - times have changed (and anything goes). His relationships don't affect his ability to rule. The two things are seperate.

like EDUAD VIII, I love this women, i will marry with this women, is more important for me the women I love than the monarchy.
Charles not, why? very simple, he wnat to be with camilla in private, with diana in public (for childen) and one day to be king. But this don't work.
to many king yes work, but for charles not.

Who said he wanted to be with Camilla in private and Diana in public? If there were cracks in Charles and Diana's relationship (caused by both of them) then they would have split up regardless of any involvement regarding Camilla. At the end of the day they both caused each other hurt and did some silly things, they divorced, Diana started her own life and now Charles should be alowed to do the same thing.

Charles married Diana for England yes. He wanted to love her and I believe he did. But it wasnt a love that makes relationships. He brought Diana into the world and brought to beutiful children into the world. Diana did a great job in the world. Camilla was smart. She knew the pains of being a royal and did not want to be Queen. Unfortunatly, she thought she could shake off her feeling for the Prince but they did not disappear so easily. They have matured and married later on. There was pain and agony but it was only one part of the saga and not the whole part. They were happy and had a good time. They werent miserable most of the time. Dont forget the good times. They did exist and more than the misery.

A lot of people post irrational things on these boards. I've got some irrational likes/dislikes of my own. That's OK but people have to expect to have their posts questioned by others. It's a public board.

And explaining why you think as you do even if it is irrational is what makes for an adult discussion.

For example, tiaraprin, you came back and explained why you felt as you did about life being unfair. I don't know about the others, but I really appreciated the fact that you did that. If more people did that more often (and a lot of people here already do), we would have a more adult discussion.

I am talking abuot the '80. charles sleep with camilla the night before he married with diana. I remenber when the queen want married with the duke of edimburgh the king don't want and she was very clear, she will abdicate if she no can married with phillip (finally the king said yes), charles not, he do that the mother and father said must do (married with diana)

__________________Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".-www.theroyalist.net-

Actually Charles and Camilla did not sleep together the day before the marriage. That was one of Dianas lies that has been disproven over time. It would have been impossible for them to have hooked up.

and about the royal train? when he was engaged with diana in 1981? there are photos of that.

__________________Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".-www.theroyalist.net-

Threads go in circles because every once in awhile a new member posts who hasn't read the previous history. That can't be helped. I don't read all of a previous thread before posting either. So the rest of the members have to backtrack and bring the new person up to speed.

It would probably be better if we just referred them to the rest of the thread rather than re-hashing stuff.

Corazon, pictures don't mean a thing. They show us what we want to see. I have a photograph of Queen Anne-Marie laughing whilst cuddling Prince Charles - does it mean he was having an affair with her? The Royal Train story is total nonsence and I believe has been disproved.

Royal Train. I dont know about that. Could you post pics please. It sounds intresting.

when charles was engaged with diana in 1981 camilla and charles was togheter in the royal train few days before the wedding, I looking for the photos, was front page in many newspaper. first the press said was diana the mysterious blonde woman, but was camilla, diana was in palace.

__________________Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".-www.theroyalist.net-